SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Chh) 199

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arup Kumar Goswami, Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, JJ.
Bali Nagwanshi, Son of Shri Buter Nagwanshi - Appellant
Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. - Respondent
WA No. 81, 64, 77, 83, 115, 129, 144, 119 of 2022
Decided On : 28-06-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Heard Mr. Prashant Bhushan, assisted by Mr. Amit Verma, Mr. Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Mr. Siddharth Shukla, Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Mr. Varun Sharma, Adv.
For the Respondents:Mr. Vikas Singh, assisted by Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Mr. Ujjwal Choubey and Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, Ms. Astha Shukla, learned Government Advocate and Mr. Vikram Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State and Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Advs.

Headnote:

Constitution of India,1950 - Article 226 - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - Section 26 - Railways Act, 1989 - Sections 20(E), 186, 20(F) (vi) and (vii) – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 – Section 102 - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 – Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 109 - Chhattisgarh Municipalities Act, 1961 - Sections 5(A), 20(G) and 29(1) - Execution of the Special Railway Project - Acquisition of lands - Acquire lands - Construction of single railway line of length of broad-gauge single railway line was declared as Special Railway Project by Gazette execution of this railway project, 1863 hectares of land was proposed to be acquired, out hectares were private lands was issued under Section 20A of Railways Act, 1989 competent authority declaring the intention to acquire the lands for execution of the Special Railway Project - After granting time for objections, the notification for acquisition of lands was issued under Section 20E of the Act - land was situated in Village affected persons as their lands were acquired for this Special Railway Project - proceeded for determination of the award in application - Plots situated in the colony developed also acquired for this project. Compensation for land acquired from Bali was determined as 70.62 Crores for the total area of the land which was acquired – Held, Criminal Procedure Code and also the Collector being the administrative head of revenue district, has the responsibility to see that rule of law prevails and he is duty bound to take cognizance whenever there is some information regarding commission of offence - Although cognizance was taken by Collector on basis of news publication, but the Collector did not proceed to lodge FIR only on that basis - Enquiry was conducted by a team constituted by Collector and on the submission of report of inquiry by said Committee, the action has been taken for lodging of FIR in this case - There is no such restriction under the provisions of Act, 1989 and further, the inquiry report can not be said to be against the railway authorities or against the railway project. The report mentions about the diversion of railway project, regarding which, suspicion has been raised - W.A. No. 81 of 2022, W.A. 64 of 2022, W.A.77 of 2022, W.A. 83 of 2022, W.A. 115 of 2022, W.A.129 of 2022 and W.A.144 of 2022 are not fit to be allowed - W.A. No. 119 of 2022 is fit to be allowed – Ordered Accordingly.

JUDGMENT :

R.C.S. Samant, J.

1. Writ Appeal No.64/2022 has been preferred challenging the order dated 10.01.2022 passed in Writ Petition(Civil) No. 3355/2019 by which the petition was allowed and the award dated 12.02.2018 passed by the Competent Authority and the Arbitration Award passed by the Commissioner, Jagdalpur dated 11.7.2019 were set aside. Writ Appeal No.81/2022 has been preferred against the order dated 10.1.2022 in Writ Petition(Cr.) No.1031/2019. Writ Appeal No.81/2022 is preferred against the same order by which the order dated 10.1.2022 in WPC No.3355/2019 has been challenged. In Writ Appeal No.119/2022 the order of Single Bench in Writ Petition(Cr.)No.828/2019 passed on 10.1.2022, dismissing the petition is under challenge. In Writ Appeal No.144/2022 the order of Single Bench dated 10.1.2022 dismissing the Writ Petition(Cr.) No.1096/2019 has been challenged. Writ Appeal No.129/2022 has been preferred against the same order dated 10.1.2022 by which the Writ Petition(Cr.) No.674/2019 preferred by the appellants, was dismissed. Writ Appeal No.83/2022 has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 10.1.2022 of Single Bench dismissing the Writ Petition(Cr.) No.751/2019. Writ Appeal No.115/2022 has been preferred against the order dated 10.1.2022 of Single Bench by which the Writ Petition(Cr.) No.1037/2019 has been dismissed. Writ Appeal No.77/2022 has been preferred against the judgment dated 10.1.2022 by which the Writ Petition(Civil) No.3355/2019, was allowed.

2. A project for construction of single railway line of length of 140km named as Rowghat, Jagdalpur broad-gauge single railway line was declared as Special Railway Project by Gazette Notification dated 4.4.2016. For execution of this railway project, 1863 hectares of land was proposed to be acquired, out of which 140.233 hectares were private lands. A notification dated 21.8.2017 was issued under Section 20A of the Railways Act, 1989 (for short 'the Act, 1989'), by the competent authority declaring the intention to acquire the lands for the execution of the Special Railway Project. After granting time for objections, the notification for acquisition of lands was issued under Section 20E of the Act, 1989, on 21.12.2017. The appellants in Writ Appeal No.64/2022, 81/2022, 77/2022 and 83/2022 were the land owners, whose land was situated in Village-Palli. They were the affected persons as their lands were acquired for this Special Railway Project. The Additional Collector District Bastar/Competent Authority, proceeded for determination of the award in application No.34/2017 and passed the award date 12.2.2018 granting compensation of Rs.188.83 crores. Khasra No.123/1 of area 7000 sq. meter and khasra No.123/2 of area 19900 sq.meter was acquired from appellant Bali Nagwanshi. Plot bearing Khasra No.125/1 to 125/29, 125/31, 125/33 to 125/37, which were plots situated in the colony developed in the name of “Neelima Spandan” were also acquired for this project. Compensation for land acquired from Bali Nagwanshi was determined as 70.62 Crores for the total area of the land which was acquired being 2.69 hectares. Similarly, the compensation was determined in favor of appellant Neelima Belsariya to the tune of Rs.25.19 Crores for the total area of the land which was acquired being 1.040 hectares.

3. Appellant Bali Nagwanshi in WA No.81/2022 & 64/2022, not being satisfied with the compensation determined, preferred arbitration reference before the Commissioner, Bastar Division, on which vide order dated 11.7.2019, the Arbitration Award was given, by enhancing the compensation and granting additional amount of Rs.7,79,04,091/-.

4. The arbitration reference was also made by appellant Neelima Belsariya in WA No.83/2022 & 77/2022 before Additional Commissioner, Bastar Division, which was decided by order dated 11.7.2019 and she got an enhancement of Rs.98,39,6

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top